NVIDIA Analyst Day: Webcast Report (+PSP2 Hints)

unless i missed something or misunderstood something, after this project for Sony is completed, by around 2008, the next project would be.... Playstation4 GPU? that would be a great time to start on it. 2008 to 2011, with release of PS4 around 2012.

I dunno, seems reasonable to me.

 

Well, the question is whether the original contract included shrinks or not, and whether it was envisaged that Sony would do them and they are now not.

I think its fairly clear that there was a lot of crossover work from the 90nm version of G71 and RSX, and that may well have been factored into the development costs for RSX. It is less likely that, when a 65nm, or smaller iterations, of RSX is required that NVIDIA are likely to need that on the desktop side, so there is less cross development. In this case it could be concievable that ark would cost more in terms of development.

 

While of course I agree that the synergy/leveraging isn't there, neither is FlexIO. This would be a pure shrink, even more so than G71 given that they dont' even need the clocks to change. Add in that Sony is responsible for the manufacturing in the first place, and I have to wonder just how many man hours would be required from NV to make this happen.

Otoh, if NV still owns the IP, that might mean it is required for them to do this work as Sony might not even have access to the. . .err, "source" (whatever that means in hardware world). I mean, I see the advantage to NV of structuring it that way, but Sony is not quite the babe-in-the-woods that MS was re NV2A. If I'm Sony I want NV on call (and particularly for QA/cert), but I'm trying to do as much as I can with internal resources rather than paying NV cost+ for all the engineering tasks.

 

The only thing that keeps me wondering about the Sony/NVidia relationship is who's screwing who?

Jawed

 

hmmm... do you think sony ever consider ati?

or did they simply have to get somoenone else then theire two rivals?
with theire custom cpu they have somthing to blabber about...... even though it is from ibm as are the cpus in 360 and rev.

 

Well, these guys that EE Times are citing seem to be thinking it's beyond RSX: http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=183702699

And the interesting quote re what previous contractual arrangements were is here (tho maybe it's upstream too, I didn't check):

Why would they anticipate that contract revenue would drop off, if shrinks of RSX were the topic? That's entirely predictable after all, and certainly must have been not just foreseen but positively counted on as happening, whoever was slated to do the work.

 

Source is still relevant in the hardware world as the logic design is still written in a programming language like VHDL or Verilog. Just look at Sun's recent open sourcing of UltraSparc T1 (Niagra).

Another possibility for a new contract is a combination shrink and logic changes. Maybe they've identified some ways to reduce size and power. For example, the move to 45nm might allow them to double the clock and half the pipes. A straight 65nm shrink was probably in the initial contract.

 

Good point.

 

Without knowing the terms of the contract its impossible to say - for instance, do we know that the royalties due weren't initially based on a sliding scale over time?

 

I think Nvidia is pretty much in the bag for both PSP2 and PS4. I mean, who else is Sony going to turn to?

back to themselves and/or Toshiba ? highly doubt it.

ATI? Microsoft and Nintendo have ATI pretty busy.

PowerVR? not a chance.

 

If NVIDIA wants go gain a stronger foothold in the handheld and in extension PDA/mobile markets, the current AR1x family (5500 included) is far from being sufficient.

Reasonable speculation would tell me that they would create/release something that can be scaled for different markets under a sales synergy logic. And yes selling IP in such markets is essential.

PSP1 was some sort of a toe in the water in the handheld market from Sony and IMO someone could view it as a PS2 derivative in relative terms. It's successor ("PSP2" or whatever they'll call it) could very well be a derivative of PS3. When SONY/NVIDIA announced the PS3 deal, there was a note somewhere that it includes further multimedia related products beyond the console in question.

The real question in the back of my mind is whether SONY has an exclusive contract for hypothetical IP above or if NVIDIA can sell it elsewhere too. If it's the latter then it sounds like a win-win situation for NVIDIA; in any other case other IHVs can rub their hands and sell their own IP to interested customers way easier.

 

link

 

A completely different architecture?

<Geo checks dictionary quickly --hmm, there appears to be a 'J', so that's not it.>

 

I think they both make nice profits. Symbiotic if you want.

 

Marketing blabber. PR, PR and PR.

 

That quote is from before G70 release, I just realized. So still shaky, but not quite as bald a. . err. . . statement as I was thinking.